Charlie wrote in post #18522628
I havent used older MF cams and was under the impression that the DF was a "smaller" dslr.
The older MF lenses like the AIS from nikon, are relatively small, but they also have no AF motors. Many lenses cant quite match the size of current mirrorless options.
AF motors might make for a larger barrel diameter, but the FL itself should not force lens dimension much.
- In the case of the Olympus OM 135 f/2.8 lens it is 80mm from front of lens to the mating surface of the lens (not including the mount itself);
the body of OM-1 is 49mm from lens mount front to back of body.
- In the case of the Canon EF 100mm f/2 lens, it is 73mm from front of lens to the mating surface of the lens (not including the mount itself);
the body of 5D is 59mm from lens mount front to back of body (omitting the distance that any controls on the back protrude past the back surface of the body)
...so the OM body is 10mm thinner, and 35mm longer FL lens only increases lens length by 7mm
OM-1 plus 135mm = 128mm total depth
5D plus 100mm = 127mm total depth
yet the dSLR looks so much bulkier, and it weighs 1.6x as much